Clinical use of percutaneous needle electrolysis in musculoskeletal injuries: A critical and systematic review of the literature

IF 1.1 Q3 SPORT SCIENCES
Daniel Martínez-Silván , Francisco Santomé-Martínez , Angélica María Champón-Chekroun , Jorge Velázquez-Saornil , Sergio Gómez-Merino , Miquel Angel Cos-Morera , Antoni Morral-Fernández , Alfons Mascaró-Vilella , Manuel Ricis-Guerra , Fernando García-Bol , Víctor Posada-Franco , Vicente Sebastiá , Carlos Cano-Herrera , Christophe Ramírez-Parenteau
{"title":"Clinical use of percutaneous needle electrolysis in musculoskeletal injuries: A critical and systematic review of the literature","authors":"Daniel Martínez-Silván ,&nbsp;Francisco Santomé-Martínez ,&nbsp;Angélica María Champón-Chekroun ,&nbsp;Jorge Velázquez-Saornil ,&nbsp;Sergio Gómez-Merino ,&nbsp;Miquel Angel Cos-Morera ,&nbsp;Antoni Morral-Fernández ,&nbsp;Alfons Mascaró-Vilella ,&nbsp;Manuel Ricis-Guerra ,&nbsp;Fernando García-Bol ,&nbsp;Víctor Posada-Franco ,&nbsp;Vicente Sebastiá ,&nbsp;Carlos Cano-Herrera ,&nbsp;Christophe Ramírez-Parenteau","doi":"10.1016/j.apunsm.2022.100396","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To review the current scientific evidence for the clinical use of percutaneous needle electrolysis (PNE) in musculoskeletal conditions.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A systematic electronic search was performed in biomedical databases. Only clinical studies on human subjects using PNE on musculoskeletal pathologies were included. Methodological quality and risk of bias were assessed using the methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS). Treatment protocols were described, and primary outcomes (pain, injury-related function, and tissue structure) were compared against other treatment modalities or control groups in short (&lt;1 month), mid (1-3 months) and long term (&gt;3 months).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Twenty-one studies met eligibility criteria (14 comparative studies and 7 case series). Sixty-two percent were at moderate to high risk of bias. PNE was applied in a wide range of injury types (mostly tendon-related), and application protocols were heterogeneous in terms of dosage (intensity: 0.35-6mA; time: 9-90sec), frequency (from twice a week to once every 2 weeks) and treatment duration (1-10 weeks). PNE showed moderate effects on pain at short and mid-term compared to active exercise interventions alone and sham needling. There is limited evidence that PNE improves injury-related function compared to other treatment modalities and no evidence of tissue structure improvement after PNE application.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>There is paucity of high-quality clinical studies about PNE in musculoskeletal conditions and lack of consensus about treatment indications and application protocols. Although a moderate effect on pain at short and mid-term has been documented, further research is needed.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100113,"journal":{"name":"Apunts Sports Medicine","volume":"57 216","pages":"Article 100396"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666506922000189/pdfft?md5=3abc86af529e4645d0faa4ce3b3cf6cb&pid=1-s2.0-S2666506922000189-main.pdf","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Apunts Sports Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666506922000189","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Objective

To review the current scientific evidence for the clinical use of percutaneous needle electrolysis (PNE) in musculoskeletal conditions.

Methods

A systematic electronic search was performed in biomedical databases. Only clinical studies on human subjects using PNE on musculoskeletal pathologies were included. Methodological quality and risk of bias were assessed using the methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS). Treatment protocols were described, and primary outcomes (pain, injury-related function, and tissue structure) were compared against other treatment modalities or control groups in short (<1 month), mid (1-3 months) and long term (>3 months).

Results

Twenty-one studies met eligibility criteria (14 comparative studies and 7 case series). Sixty-two percent were at moderate to high risk of bias. PNE was applied in a wide range of injury types (mostly tendon-related), and application protocols were heterogeneous in terms of dosage (intensity: 0.35-6mA; time: 9-90sec), frequency (from twice a week to once every 2 weeks) and treatment duration (1-10 weeks). PNE showed moderate effects on pain at short and mid-term compared to active exercise interventions alone and sham needling. There is limited evidence that PNE improves injury-related function compared to other treatment modalities and no evidence of tissue structure improvement after PNE application.

Conclusion

There is paucity of high-quality clinical studies about PNE in musculoskeletal conditions and lack of consensus about treatment indications and application protocols. Although a moderate effect on pain at short and mid-term has been documented, further research is needed.

经皮针电解法治疗肌肉骨骼损伤的临床应用:对相关文献的系统回顾
目的综述目前经皮穿刺电解法治疗骨骼肌疾病的临床应用的科学依据。方法对生物医学数据库进行系统的电子检索。仅包括使用PNE治疗肌肉骨骼病变的人类临床研究。使用非随机研究(未成年人)的方法学指数评估方法学质量和偏倚风险。描述了治疗方案,并将主要结果(疼痛、损伤相关功能和组织结构)与其他治疗方式或对照组在短期(1个月)、中期(1-3个月)和长期(3个月)进行比较。结果21项研究符合入选标准(14项比较研究和7项病例系列研究)。62%的人有中等到高度的偏倚风险。PNE应用于广泛的损伤类型(主要是肌腱相关),应用方案在剂量方面存在差异(强度:0.35-6mA;时间:9-90秒),频率(从每周2次到每2周1次),治疗时间(1-10周)。与单独的积极运动干预和假针刺相比,PNE对短期和中期疼痛的影响中等。与其他治疗方式相比,PNE改善损伤相关功能的证据有限,并且没有证据表明PNE应用后组织结构改善。结论PNE治疗骨骼肌疾病的临床研究缺乏高质量的研究,在治疗指征和应用方案上缺乏共识。虽然对短期和中期疼痛的中度影响已被证明,但还需要进一步的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信